Equal Treatment in Land Use Planning: Investigating the Ethics of the Transfer of Development Rights

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesco Chiodelli
Keyword(s):  
Land Use ◽  
Land Use Planning ◽  
Equal Treatment ◽  
Development Rights ◽  
Transfer Of Development Rights

Transfer of development rights and urban land markets

2017 ◽  
Vol 49 (5) ◽  
pp. 1122-1145 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evangeline R Linkous
Keyword(s):  
Land Use ◽  
Land Use Planning ◽  
Imperfect Information ◽  
Program Design ◽  
Urban Land ◽  
Land Markets ◽  
Information Uncertainty ◽  
Development Rights ◽  
Transfer Of Development Rights ◽  
Urban Land Markets

Transfer of development rights (TDR) is seen as an important tool for land use planning, in large part because it leverages market mechanisms. TDR extends market concepts used primarily in emissions trading programs to the arena of land use. However, with the exception of a handful of success stories, TDR programs generate few transfers. Although researchers generally attribute the weak performance of TDR to program design flaws, this study demonstrates that the unique conditions presented by urban land markets explain, in part, why TDR programs often underperform. I present a case study of a TDR program in Sarasota, Florida, to address two questions. First, what attributes of urban land markets may impact TDR program design and outcomes? Second, is TDR a planning tool that can achieve desired planning goals, given the conditions of land markets? I find that the unique features of land markets—specifically (1) the sensitivity of development to timing; (2) imperfect information, uncertainty, and speculative activity; (3) unique features of land; (4) the limited number of buyers and sellers; and (5) the development orientation of urban political and planning institutions—distort the market for transferable development rights. The Sarasota case demonstrates how local land market characteristics contributed to a set of incremental program design and implementation decisions that, in sum, amounted to significant departures from fundamental program principles and mechanisms. These resulted in imperfect market conditions and rendered the TDR program ineffective.

Reviewing the role of habitat banking and tradable development rights in the conservation policy mix

2015 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 294-305 ◽  
Author(s):  
RUI SANTOS ◽  
CHRISTOPH SCHRÖTER-SCHLAACK ◽  
PAULA ANTUNES ◽  
IRENE RING ◽  
PEDRO CLEMENTE
Keyword(s):  
Land Use ◽  
Biodiversity Conservation ◽  
Land Use Planning ◽  
Social Impact ◽  
Policy Instruments ◽  
Conservation Policy ◽  
Time Lags ◽  
Policy Mix ◽  
Biodiversity Offsets ◽  
Development Rights

SUMMARYHabitat banking and tradable development rights (TDR) have gained considerable currency as a way of achieving ‘no net loss’ of biodiversity and of reconciling nature conservation with economic development goals. This paper reviews the use of these instruments for biodiversity conservation and assesses their roles in the policy mix. The two instruments are compared in terms of effectiveness, cost effectiveness, social impact, institutional context and legal requirements. The role in the policy mix is discussed highlighting sequential relationships, as well as complementarities or synergies, redundancy and conflicts with other instruments, such as biodiversity offsets and land-use zoning.Habitat banking and TDR have the potential to contribute to biodiversity conservation objectives and attain cost-effective solutions with positive social impacts on local communities and landowners. They can also help to create a new mind-set more favourable to public-private cooperation in biodiversity conservation. At the same time, these policy instruments face a number of theoretical and implementation challenges, such as additionality and equivalence of offsets, endurance of land-use planning regulations, monitoring of offset performance, or time lags between restoration and resulting conservation benefits.A clear, enforceable regulatory approach is a prerequisite for the success of habitat banking and TDR. In return, these schemes provide powerful incentives for compliance with regulatory norms and ensure a more equitable allocation of the benefits and costs of land-use controls and conservation. Environmentally harmful subsidies in other policy sectors as well as alternative offset options, however, reduce the attractiveness and effectiveness of these instruments. Thus, the overall performance of habitat banking and TDR hinges on how they are integrated into the biodiversity conservation policy mix and fine-tuned with other sectoral policies.

Transfer of Development Rights: An Analysis of a New Land Use Policy Tool: Reply

1976 ◽  
Vol 58 (4_Part_1) ◽  
pp. 763-766 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard L. Barrows ◽  
Bruce A. Prenguber
Keyword(s):  
Land Use ◽  
Land Use Policy ◽  
Policy Tool ◽  
Development Rights ◽  
Transfer Of Development Rights

Transfer of Development Rights: An Analysis of a New Land Use Policy Tool: Reply

1977 ◽  
Vol 59 (2) ◽  
pp. 394-396
Author(s):  
Richard L. Barrows ◽  
Marvin B. Johnson ◽  
Bruce A. Prenguber
Keyword(s):  
Land Use ◽  
Land Use Policy ◽  
Policy Tool ◽  
Development Rights ◽  
Transfer Of Development Rights

Transfer development rights and land use planning in the United States

1996 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 147-166
Author(s):  
Edward H. Ziegler
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Land Use ◽  
Land Use Planning ◽  
The United States ◽  
Development Rights

scholarly journals Transfer of Development Rights – Its Problems and Potential as a Land-Use Control Technique

1973 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 185-197 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donn A. Derr ◽  
Thomas Norman ◽  
Lee D. Schneider
Keyword(s):  
Land Use ◽  
Resource Use ◽  
Open Space ◽  
Control Mechanism ◽  
Control Technique ◽  
Natural Resource Use ◽  
Land Use Controls ◽  
Development Rights ◽  
Transfer Of Development Rights ◽  
Land Use Control

In the Northeast, major problems relating to natural resource use, particularly agriculture, can be attributable in large part to outgrowths of the rural-urban interface. As communities (cities, towns, boroughs, townships, and counties) strive to fulfill their basic needs for health, education, police protection, recreation, housing, highways, and productive open space, new and more sophisticated methods of implementing land-use controls are needed. Experience indicates that in rapidly urbanizing areas traditional land-use mechanisms for directing growth do not guarantee the degree of permanence that is required to preserve productive open space. An alternative land-use control mechanism to ensure open space preservation explored in this paper is the transfer of development rights and the purchase of development easements.

The Transfer of Development Rights: A New Technique of Land Use Regulation

1976 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 620
Author(s):  
Jerome G. Rose
Keyword(s):  
Land Use ◽  
New Technique ◽  
Land Use Regulation ◽  
Development Rights ◽  
Transfer Of Development Rights ◽  
A New Technique

Transfer of Development Rights: An Analysis of a New Land Use Policy Tool

1975 ◽  
Vol 57 (4) ◽  
pp. 549-557 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard L. Barrows ◽  
Bruce A. Prenguber
Keyword(s):  
Land Use ◽  
Land Use Policy ◽  
Policy Tool ◽  
Development Rights ◽  
Transfer Of Development Rights

Transfer of Development Rights: An Analysis of a New Land Use Policy Tool: Comment

1976 ◽  
Vol 58 (4_Part_1) ◽  
pp. 761-762 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leslie E. Small
Keyword(s):  
Land Use ◽  
Land Use Policy ◽  
Policy Tool ◽  
Development Rights ◽  
Transfer Of Development Rights
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document